Searching for Standard French: the Construction and Mining of the Recueil Historique Des Grammaires Du Français
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics 2015; 1(1): 13–55 Shana Poplack*, Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz, Nathalie Dion and Nicole Rosen Searching for standard French: The construction and mining of the Recueil historique des grammaires du français Abstract: This paper describes a massive project to characterize “Standard French” by constructing and mining the Recueil historique des grammaires du français (RHGF), a corpus of grammars whose prescriptive dictates we interpret as representing the evolution of the standard over five centuries. Its originality lies in the possibility it affords to ascertain the existence of prior variability, date it, and determine the conditions under which grammarians accept or condemn variant uses. Systematic meta-analyses of the RHGF reveal that grammarians rarely acknowledge the existence of alternate ways of expressing the same thing. Instead, they adopt three major strategies to establish form-function symmetry. All involve partitioning competing variants across distinct social, semantic or linguistic contexts, despite pervasive disagreement over which variant to associ- ate with which. This effectively factors out variability. In contrast, systematic analysis of actual language use, as instantiated in the spontaneous speech of 323 speakers of Quebec French over an apparent-time period of a century and a half, reveals robust variability, regularly conditioned by contextual elements which have never been acknowledged by grammarians. This conditioning has remained largely stable since at least the mid-nineteenth century. Taken together, these results indicate that the “rules” for variant selection promulgated by grammarians do not inform the spoken language, nor do grammars take account of the variable rules structuring spontaneous speech. As a result, grammar and usage are evolving independently. *Corresponding author: Shana Poplack, Department of Linguistics, University of Ottawa, Canada, E-mail: [email protected] Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz, Toronto, Canada, E-mail: [email protected] Nathalie Dion, Department of Linguistics, University of Ottawa, Canada, E-mail: [email protected] Nicole Rosen, Department of Linguistics, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada, E-mail: [email protected] 14 Shana Poplack et al. Keywords: standard language, prescriptive grammar, language variation and change, linguistic ideology, prescription versus praxis, French DOI 10.1515/jhsl-2015-0002 Ce qui n’est pas clair n’est pas français. ‘What isn’t clear isn’t French.’ Rivarol (1784) 1 Introduction Like many sociolinguists whose stock-in-trade is ordinary speech, we have been struck by the number of everyday usages that are routinely labeled, by grammar- ians and speakers alike, as non-standard. In the particular case we deal with here, that of French spoken in Canada, these items are not restricted to the uneducated or the underprivileged, but are actually used by individuals from all walks of life. The sheer extent of these “lapses”, as many casual observers consider them, piqued our curiosity as to how, when and why they developed, whether they were changes from an earlier, “better” stage of the language, as is often implied, and what that stage might have looked like. More generally, we wanted to characterize the constitution and evolution of Standard French, so as to achieve a better understanding of what the non-standard uses are deviating from. These are diachronic questions, but ones that pose thornier challenges than most reconstructions tackled by historical linguists. Pertinent data is particularly hard to come by. Indeed, given the heavy ideological component of the normative enterprise (e.g. Milroy and Milroy 1999; Armstrong and Mackenzie 2013), it is difficult enough to arrive at an adequate characterization of contemporary stan- dards, let alone those of earlier times. Complicating the matter is the fact that almost all of the non-standard uses targeted are the product of inherent variability: they simply alternate with prescribed counterparts in expressing the same refer- ential meaning or fulfilling the same grammatical function. Thus, any attempt to trace the trajectory of non-standard forms must incorporate a method for detecting the existence of prior variability. In this paper we describe a long-term project that addresses these challenges by constructing and mining a corpus of grammars, the Recueil historique des grammaires du français (‘Diachronic Compendium of French Grammars’; RHGF), whose dictates we interpret as representing the evolution of standard French over a period of five centuries. Searching for Standard French 15 In the popular conception, standardization is construed as the natural out- come of the normative enterprise. Such is the general faith in the invariance and immutability of the standard language that its precepts are rarely challenged. Instead, deviations, real or perceived, are often equated with change, an out- come to be avoided. The goal of our project is to problematize this state of affairs by subjecting the prescriptive injunctions constituting the standard, as instan- tiated by the RHGF, to systematic diachronic analysis. Adopting the working hypothesis (Poplack et al. 2002) that forms salient enough to have incited the opprobrium of grammarians were not only attested but likely widespread, we show that prescriptive injunctions can reveal the historical antecedents of much current variability. Indeed, when properly exploited, the data of the RHGF enable us to 1) infer the existence of competing variants and approximately date them, 2) discern hints of linguistic and social conditioning of variable usage, and 3) assess the trajectory and fate of the variants designated as standard. This information is in turn incorporated into analyses of contemporary usage in ways described below, allowing us to reconstruct the evolution of specific variables and trace the social history of their variants, thereby providing a check on the inference of change. Results of our meta-analyses, described in ensuing sections, reveal surpris- ing inconsistencies in the treatment of many important linguistic features across time, amongst grammarians, and even within the same period and grammar. Instead of the consensus generally assumed for standard language, we find pervasive indeterminacy and contradiction, to an extent hitherto unreported. Both prescriptions and proscriptions turn out to be arbitrary and labile. Moreover, much of the variability censured as non-standard in contemporary French was recognized as far back as the earliest grammars. Grammarians’ response has been to endeavour to eradicate this variability, through a number of strategies detailed in Section 8. The goal, now firmly entrenched in prescrip- tive (and linguistic) thought, is to (re-)establish symmetry by positing a one-to- one relationship between form and function, context, or (especially) meaning. This is reflected in the long-standing tradition of matching each variant choice with a dedicated motive. Comparisons with the way the language was actually spoken during some of the periods in which these prescriptive dictates were being issued (Section 9) show that spontaneous speech has remained virtually impervious to them. The regular, if implicit, rules constraining variability in speech are in turn unacknowledged by the prescriptive enterprise. As a result, the spoken language turns out to be far more structured, systematic and stable than the injunctions making up the standard. These findings suggest that there is not now, nor has there been, a coherent enduring entity that can objectively be qualified as Standard French. 16 Shana Poplack et al. 2 The legacy of the French grammatical tradition As one of the most codified of the world’s languages, French has been the subject of a highly developed grammatical tradition. Indeed, the very notion of grammaire is synonymous with “correct”. The concern with regulating the French language originated in officially sanctioned efforts to emancipate it from Latin, culminating in the Edict of Villers-Cotterêts of 1539. To achieve the required legitimacy, the language would need rules; apparently, the more intricate and dogmatic, the better. The objective of the first grammarians was thus to create structure out of the anarchy and variability thought to characterize French in its pre-codified stage. The earliest (sixteenth-century) works were modeled after classical grammars, forcing grammarians to fit French into Greek and Latin categories, even where not relevant (e.g. nominal declension). Conversely, French innovations, such as the article, were not acknowledged. Thus began the enduring tradition of endorsing and promoting as “correct” forms which may never actually have been used by ordinary people, while denigrating many that were. By the seventeenth century, while still attempting to “fix” the language, grammarians had shifted their benchmark from Latin to the language spoken by their aristocratic peers. An increasingly powerful gram- matical machine (Denis 1949: 220) was bolstered by the creation, early in the century, of the Académie française, whose mandate, under the patronage of Louis XIII, was …travailler avec tout le soin et toute la diligence possibles à donner des règles certaines à notre langue et à la rendre pure, éloquente et capable de traiter les arts et les sciences. (Académie française 1635: article 24) ‘to work with all possible care and diligence to endow our language with fixed rules, and render it pure, eloquent and capable of treating